TSTP Solution File: LAT263-2 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : LAT263-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8042.1875MB
% OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Thu Aug 31 05:57:52 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.19s 0.65s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : LAT263-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Thu Aug 24 06:00:35 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.57 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.19/0.64 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.64 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.19/0.64 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.19/0.64 % Transform :cnf
% 0.19/0.64 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.19/0.64 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.19/0.64
% 0.19/0.64 % Result :Theorem 0.010000s
% 0.19/0.64 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.010000s
% 0.19/0.64 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.65 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.65 % File : LAT263-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.19/0.65 % Domain : Analysis
% 0.19/0.65 % Problem : Problem about Tarski's fixed point theorem
% 0.19/0.65 % Version : [Pau06] axioms : Reduced > Especial.
% 0.19/0.65 % English :
% 0.19/0.65
% 0.19/0.65 % Refs : [Pau06] Paulson (2006), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.19/0.65 % Source : [Pau06]
% 0.19/0.65 % Names :
% 0.19/0.65
% 0.19/0.65 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.19/0.65 % Rating : 0.00 v5.3.0, 0.08 v5.2.0, 0.00 v4.1.0, 0.11 v4.0.1, 0.17 v3.3.0, 0.29 v3.2.0
% 0.19/0.65 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 8 ( 7 unt; 0 nHn; 6 RR)
% 0.19/0.65 % Number of literals : 11 ( 3 equ; 4 neg)
% 0.19/0.65 % Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% 0.19/0.65 % Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 0.19/0.65 % Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 0 prp; 2-3 aty)
% 0.19/0.65 % Number of functors : 13 ( 13 usr; 7 con; 0-3 aty)
% 0.19/0.65 % Number of variables : 8 ( 0 sgn)
% 0.19/0.65 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_SEQ_HRN
% 0.19/0.65
% 0.19/0.65 % Comments : The problems in the [Pau06] collection each have very many axioms,
% 0.19/0.65 % of which only a small selection are required for the refutation.
% 0.19/0.65 % The mission is to find those few axioms, after which a refutation
% 0.19/0.65 % can be quite easily found. This version has only the necessary
% 0.19/0.65 % axioms.
% 0.19/0.65 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.65 cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
% 0.19/0.65 c_lessequals(v_S,v_A,tc_set(t_a)) ).
% 0.19/0.65
% 0.19/0.65 cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
% 0.19/0.65 ~ c_in(c_Tarski_Oglb(v_S,v_cl,t_a),v_A,t_a) ).
% 0.19/0.65
% 0.19/0.65 cnf(cls_Tarski_OA_A_61_61_Apset_Acl_0,axiom,
% 0.19/0.65 v_A = c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl,t_a,tc_Product__Type_Ounit) ).
% 0.19/0.65
% 0.19/0.65 cnf(cls_Tarski_OCL_Olub__in__lattice_0,axiom,
% 0.19/0.65 ( ~ c_in(V_cl,c_Tarski_OCompleteLattice,tc_Tarski_Opotype_Opotype__ext__type(T_a,tc_Product__Type_Ounit))
% 0.19/0.65 | ~ c_in(V_cl,c_Tarski_OPartialOrder,tc_Tarski_Opotype_Opotype__ext__type(T_a,tc_Product__Type_Ounit))
% 0.19/0.65 | ~ c_lessequals(V_S,c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(V_cl,T_a,tc_Product__Type_Ounit),tc_set(T_a))
% 0.19/0.65 | c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(V_S,V_cl,T_a),c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(V_cl,T_a,tc_Product__Type_Ounit),T_a) ) ).
% 0.19/0.65
% 0.19/0.65 cnf(cls_Tarski_Odual_Acl_A_58_ACompleteLattice_0,axiom,
% 0.19/0.65 c_in(c_Tarski_Odual(v_cl,t_a),c_Tarski_OCompleteLattice,tc_Tarski_Opotype_Opotype__ext__type(t_a,tc_Product__Type_Ounit)) ).
% 0.19/0.65
% 0.19/0.65 cnf(cls_Tarski_Odual_Acl_A_58_APartialOrder_0,axiom,
% 0.19/0.65 c_in(c_Tarski_Odual(v_cl,t_a),c_Tarski_OPartialOrder,tc_Tarski_Opotype_Opotype__ext__type(t_a,tc_Product__Type_Ounit)) ).
% 0.19/0.65
% 0.19/0.65 cnf(cls_Tarski_Oglb__dual__lub_0,axiom,
% 0.19/0.65 c_Tarski_Oglb(V_S,V_cl,T_a) = c_Tarski_Olub(V_S,c_Tarski_Odual(V_cl,T_a),T_a) ).
% 0.19/0.65
% 0.19/0.65 cnf(cls_Tarski_Opset_A_Idual_Acl_J_A_61_61_Apset_Acl_0,axiom,
% 0.19/0.65 c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(c_Tarski_Odual(V_cl,T_a),T_a,tc_Product__Type_Ounit) = c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(V_cl,T_a,tc_Product__Type_Ounit) ).
% 0.19/0.65
% 0.19/0.65 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.65 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.65 % Proof found
% 0.19/0.65 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.19/0.65 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.19/0.65 %ClaNum:27(EqnAxiom:20)
% 0.19/0.65 %VarNum:19(SingletonVarNum:5)
% 0.19/0.65 %MaxLitNum:4
% 0.19/0.65 %MaxfuncDepth:2
% 0.19/0.65 %SharedTerms:17
% 0.19/0.65 %goalClause: 22 26
% 0.19/0.65 %singleGoalClaCount:2
% 0.19/0.65 [21]E(f3(a1,a2,a8),a9)
% 0.19/0.65 [22]P1(a12,a9,f10(a2))
% 0.19/0.65 [23]P2(f4(a1,a2),a5,f11(a2,a8))
% 0.19/0.65 [24]P2(f4(a1,a2),a6,f11(a2,a8))
% 0.19/0.65 [26]~P2(f7(a12,f4(a1,a2),a2),a9,a2)
% 0.19/0.65 [25]E(f3(f4(x251,x252),x252,a8),f3(x251,x252,a8))
% 0.19/0.65 [27]~P1(x271,f3(x272,x273,a8),f10(x273))+P2(f7(x271,x272,x273),f3(x272,x273,a8),x273)+~P2(x272,a6,f11(x273,a8))+~P2(x272,a5,f11(x273,a8))
% 0.19/0.65 %EqnAxiom
% 0.19/0.65 [1]E(x11,x11)
% 0.19/0.65 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 0.19/0.65 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 0.19/0.65 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f3(x41,x43,x44),f3(x42,x43,x44))
% 0.19/0.65 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f3(x53,x51,x54),f3(x53,x52,x54))
% 0.19/0.65 [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f3(x63,x64,x61),f3(x63,x64,x62))
% 0.19/0.65 [7]~E(x71,x72)+E(f10(x71),f10(x72))
% 0.19/0.65 [8]~E(x81,x82)+E(f4(x81,x83),f4(x82,x83))
% 0.19/0.65 [9]~E(x91,x92)+E(f4(x93,x91),f4(x93,x92))
% 0.19/0.65 [10]~E(x101,x102)+E(f11(x101,x103),f11(x102,x103))
% 0.19/0.65 [11]~E(x111,x112)+E(f11(x113,x111),f11(x113,x112))
% 0.19/0.65 [12]~E(x121,x122)+E(f7(x121,x123,x124),f7(x122,x123,x124))
% 0.19/0.65 [13]~E(x131,x132)+E(f7(x133,x131,x134),f7(x133,x132,x134))
% 0.19/0.65 [14]~E(x141,x142)+E(f7(x143,x144,x141),f7(x143,x144,x142))
% 0.19/0.65 [15]P1(x152,x153,x154)+~E(x151,x152)+~P1(x151,x153,x154)
% 0.19/0.65 [16]P1(x163,x162,x164)+~E(x161,x162)+~P1(x163,x161,x164)
% 0.19/0.65 [17]P1(x173,x174,x172)+~E(x171,x172)+~P1(x173,x174,x171)
% 0.19/0.65 [18]P2(x182,x183,x184)+~E(x181,x182)+~P2(x181,x183,x184)
% 0.19/0.65 [19]P2(x193,x192,x194)+~E(x191,x192)+~P2(x193,x191,x194)
% 0.19/0.65 [20]P2(x203,x204,x202)+~E(x201,x202)+~P2(x203,x204,x201)
% 0.19/0.65
% 0.19/0.65 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.65 cnf(29,plain,
% 0.19/0.65 (P1(a12,f3(a1,a2,a8),f10(a2))),
% 0.19/0.65 inference(scs_inference,[],[22,21,2,16])).
% 0.19/0.65 cnf(44,plain,
% 0.19/0.65 (~P2(f7(a12,f4(a1,a2),a2),f3(a1,a2,a8),a2)),
% 0.19/0.66 inference(scs_inference,[],[22,21,26,25,2,16,3,14,13,12,11,10,9,8,7,6,5,4,20,19])).
% 0.19/0.66 cnf(53,plain,
% 0.19/0.66 (~P1(a12,f3(f4(a1,a2),a2,a8),f10(a2))),
% 0.19/0.66 inference(scs_inference,[],[24,23,25,44,19,27])).
% 0.19/0.66 cnf(77,plain,
% 0.19/0.66 ($false),
% 0.19/0.66 inference(scs_inference,[],[25,29,53,16,2]),
% 0.19/0.66 ['proof']).
% 0.19/0.66 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.19/0.66 % Total time :0.010000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------